United States v. Luis Sanchez

MEMORANDUM

Luis Sanchez appeals his jury conviction and sentence for one count of importing methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. See United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 940 (9th Cir.2007) (holding that Rule 4(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, unlike Rule 4(a), is a non-jurisdictional claim-processing rule subject to forfeiture).

First, the district court did not plainly err when it allowed the border officer to explain why he directed Sanchez’s car to a secondary inspection lot. Evidence is relevant if “(a) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and (b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action.” Fed.R.Evid. 401; see United States v. Wycoff, 545 F.2d 679, 681 (9th Cir.1977) (concluding that evidence showing a criminal defendant was advised of his rights was relevant “to lay a proper foundation for the admission of any statements given” later by the defendant). Here, the border officer’s reasons for referring Sanchez’s car to the secondary inspection lot explain how the car, which moved across the border from Mexico…